On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 04:29:30PM -0400, Richard A Nelson wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, Julian Gilbey wrote: > > > So was the <conflictor's postrm> actually called with the purge > > option? It doesn't appear to have done. > > Not that I can find
Good. > Since both packages must have the same postrm, and they remove *alot* > of files, things can get really nasty if I'm not careful: > 1) Install sendmail > 2) customize & play with things > 3) Decide to install sendmail-tls > 4) hrm, sendmail is no longer needed, but still has some conffiles, > lets dpkg --purge it > At this point, many files in /etc/mail, /var/spool/mqueue, etc have > now been erased... This what I don't want to happen to a user... Ah, very good point. Why not simply add in the purge section a block around it which says: if ! [ -f <some file in the .deb which characterises the sendmail(-tls) packages> ] then delete a lot of files fi > > You might also be interested in the call: > > <conflictor's-prerm> remove in-favour <package> <new-version> > > This might possibly help you. See the policy manual, section 6.4. > > I'm perusing that now, it might help -- even if I simply rm'd the > older packages postrm file ! No, no, no. Don't ever fiddle with dpkg's internal databases like this. (There is one very, very rare case I can think of in which this is necessary, but this isn't it. And that is where the old prerm has a trojan or equivalent nasty in it.) Julian -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://people.debian.org/~jdg Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/